the other provinces; whereas, to the people of the provinces, and
even to many of federalist faith in the province of Buenos Aires
itself, the term stood for the idea of a loose confederation in
which each provincial governor or chieftain should be practically
supreme in his own district, so long as he could maintain
himself. The Unitaries were opponents of both, except in so far
as their insistence upon a centralized form of government for the
nation would necessarily lead to the location of that government
at Buenos Aires. This peculiar dual contest between the town and
the province of Buenos Aires, and of the other provinces against
either or both, persisted for the next sixty years. In 1829,
however, a prolonged lull set in, when Rosas, the gaucho leader,
having won in company with other caudillos a decisive triumph
over the Unitaries, entered the capital and took supreme command.

In Chile the course of events had assumed quite a different
aspect. Here, in 1818, a species of constitution had been adopted
by popular vote in a manner that appeared to show remarkable
unanimity, for the books in which the "ayes" and "noes" were to
be recorded contained no entries in the negative! What the
records really prove is that O'Higgins, the Supreme Director,
enjoyed the confidence of the ruling class. In exercise of the
autocratic power entrusted to him, he now proceeded to introduce
a variety of administrative reforms of signal advantage to the
moral and material welfare of the country. But as the danger of
conquest from any quarter lessened, the demand for a more
democratic organization grew louder, until in 1822 it became so
persistent that O'Higgins called a convention to draft a new
fundamental law. But its provisions suited neither himself nor
his opponents. Thereupon, realizing that his views of the